The meal-format level of organization was first
recognized by Mary Douglas and the studies analysed below were
all influenced by her. They include the work of Douglas (1972),
Nicod (1974), and Douglas and Nicod (1974) on British
working-class meals, the work of the Russell Sage Project in
Gastronomic Categories (Douglas, 1984), and the work of Norge
Jerome (1979) on migrant Black households in northern American
cities. Meal-format rules include all of the cultural
understandings about the relationship between the meal type, the
nature of an occasion, and those present at an event. Meal
formats are structures for the presentation, distribution, and
ingestion of food and are distinguished by the number and types
of dishes they include and the way these dishes are presented.
Dishes can be presented diachronically - i.e. a series of courses
is presented in strict order over time with rules for what can go
into each course - or synchronically - i.e. dishes are presented
simultaneously in certain spatial arrays. Meal-format rules also
specify the manner of serving the dishes - whether it is
centrally controlled or not, whether there is a strict order of
precedence or not, whether there are second helpings or not, and
even the etiquette of ingestion - how food is subdivided and
carried to the mouth.

The Douglas and Nicod Study

The first major work on format rules can he
found in Douglas and Nicod. The research strategy used in this
study was long-term, first-hand observation of eating events in
four working-class households. Nicod observed mealtimes but, as
quoted above, he did not ask questions about the processes of
menu selection. He entered the households as a lodger who openly
stated he was interested in the food system. He did not develop a
close intimate relationship with the cooks in each household, nor
did he ask questions because of his concern with observer
interference with the typical pattern. For example, he was afraid
that if he asked why peas were chosen for a meal, this question
would be interpreted as critical and would influence the way peas
were used in the future. His main technique was the observation
of all combinations of foods and all types of food events in the
four households.

According to Nicod's assumption, he did not
need to probe; he could infer pattern from behaviour directly. He
could "learn the code by observing the native's
application" (1974, p. 5).

Nicod chose four households in four different
cities, and lived with the households for one month each and
observed their meal-cycles. This kind of co-operation is
difficult to find, and Nicod describes the search as one of his
greatest problems. He was particularly interested in the daily
meal-cycle and the relationship between the major meal as a
structure and the structure of Sunday dinner and major feasts (in
this case Christmas, New Year's and Christenings). Douglas and
Nicod were looking for common structural rules underlying the
meal system in the British working class (1974, p. 747).

The difference in food habits between different
social classes must not only be judged in terms of the variations
of the quality and quantity of the food items in the diet, it
must also be seen as the difference between two types of food
patterning.

How food items are structured in a meal, and
how meals are classified in a typology, are matters which require
further investigation. Insofar as there are differences between
the social classes, in the patterning of meals in their daily
menu. and in the structuring of food items in their standard
meals, the social classes have retained different systems of food
patterning....

The important dimensions examined in the study
were the sensory/aesthetic characteristics of the food and the
structural rules for ordering these attributes. The manipulation
of paired contrasts was particularly significant: wet/dry,
sweet/savoury, whole/part, hot/cold, sculptured and amorphous
were some of the contrasts used. The analysis yielded a daily
meal-cycle with a progression of increasing segregation of wet
and dry elements throughout the day. The daily cycle included a
major (potato-based) format, a minor (cereal-based) format, and a
tertiary (cake-based) format. There was a definite structural
relationship between the major daily meal and the Sunday events,
which were structurally parallel but more elaborate (table 4).

As Montgomery (1977) states in his summary of
this study:

Table 4. Patterning of meals in the British
working class (illustrating the way in which sensory variables
were used to define structures)

Course A

Course B

Course C

Main meal

Hot

Hot/cold

Cold Hot

Wet

Wet

Dry + Liquid

Savoury

Sweet

Sweet Sweet

Minor meal

Hot/cold

Cold Hot

Wet

Dry + Liquid

Savoury

Sweet Sweet

Tertiary meal

Cold Hot

Dry + Liquid

Sweet Sweet

Table 4a. Main meal

Course

Day

Dressing/
drink (a)

Staple
(A)

Centre-piece
(B)

Dressing
(b)

Trimming
(c)

A

Xmas

Gravy

Potato

Turkey
"roast"

Stuffing

2 veg+ Y pud

Sunday

Gravy

Potato

Other meat

Mint/apple

" "

Weekday

Gravy

Potato

Tomato/

Dad's

1 or 2 veg

B

Xmas

White sauce

Cereal

Fruit

Brandy

Sunday

Cream

(Cereal)

Fruit

(Juice)

Weekday

Custard

(Cereal)

Fruit

(Juice)

C

Xmas

Coffee

Cereal

Fruit

Sunday

Coffee

Weekday

Coffee

Table 4b. Minor meal

Course

Day

Dressing/drink
(a)

Staple
(A)

Centre-piece
(B)

Dressing
(b/c)

Trimming
(C)

A

Xmas

Butter

Cereal

Meat

Pickle +
salad cream

Salad

Salad

Sunday

Butter

Cereal

Meat

" "

Weekday

Butter

Cereal

Meat

Pickle

B

Xmas

(Butter/jam)

Cereal

Fruit

Cream

Sunday

(Butter/jam)

Cereal

(Tea)

Cereal (cake)

Fruit

Icing

Weekday

Tea

Cereal (cake)

Fruit

Icing

C

Xmas

Tea

Cereal (cake)

Fruit

Icing

Sunday

Weekday

Source: Nicod. 1974. p. 88.

In the major meal, segregation of liquid foods
from solid foods was important, as was the serving of certain
foods hot, the changing of dishes and utensils, and giving a
central place to potatoes. Nonreversible sequences were found in
the order of consumption: potatoes were eaten before cereals,
savories before sweets, and wet foods prior to drier items. The
shift from wet to dry was accompanied by a change from forks and
spoons to fingers. Further, through the structural sequence of
the meal, the visual pattern of the food acquired an increasing
dominance.

The Russell Sage Project Study

The second example of the analysis of meal
formats and cycles is taken from the Russell Sage Project on
Gastronomic Categories (Douglas, 1984). Organized by Mary
Douglas, this project comprised research on three ethnic food
systems in the United States: a community of Oglala Sioux, a
rural county in North Carolina, and an Italian-American enclave
in suburban Philadelphia. Each community study used a common
general methodological framework while pursuing a somewhat
different research emphasis. The study of the Oglala Sioux
emphasized the ceremonial use of food and the symbolic separation
of Sioux food and American food. The North Carolina study was
concerned with the relative importance of class or ethnicity in
diet (comparing low- and middle-class Blacks to low- and
middle-class Whites in the county), and the Italian-American
study followed the process of change in the community (Goode,
Curtis, and Theophano, 1984).

The common framework of the three studies
involved a concern with identifying meal-event types, their
occurrence within time-cycles, and their use in different places
and for different social contexts. Thus, all three projects
identified eating events, temporal cycles, commensal units
(social contexts), and eating places. In the following
discussion, I will describe the analytical categories used to
evaluate each of these components of the framework and then use
one community study to illustrate the relative significance of
different kinds of data.

Time

In any community, it is necessary to explore
the temporal cycles of activity that underlie the differentiation
of eating occasions. Meals punctuate temporal activity and ritual
cycles in all cultures. In American urban industrial life, there
are several overlapping cycles. Days and weeks are patterned by
work and leisure, with leisure activity usually occurring around
the weekend. Seasonal variations in work activities are
punctuated by the patterning of calendrical holidays - both
ritual and secular feasts. The life-cycle also generates many
occasions: births, marriages, anniversaries, and deaths. The
patterning of these cycles in local interacting communities
varies greatly in the United States. Identifying such cycles of
ordinary and extraordinary feast occasions was the first step in
the Russell Sage Project (Douglas, 1984). All communities had
daily, weekly, seasonal, and annual cycles of ordinary and feast
occasions, and although some were patterned by the national
culture, each local cycle was different. In addition, irregular,
unpredictable occurrences were also responded to in patterned
ways.

Social Context

As it is necessary to identify the temporal
framework for differentiating eating occasions in the study of
community food-patterning, it is also necessary to delineate the
types of social contexts in which eating occurs. These contexts
include: (1) the isolated individual; (2) the subhousehold group;
(3) the total domestic group; (4) the domestic group plus other
groups distinguished by kinship ties, intimacy, sex, age, and
generation; (5) large groups of kin; and (6) voluntary
associations, churches, and clubs, as well as other possible
combinations. The frequency with which particular types of
commensal units occur and the occasions for which each type is
appropriate or inappropriate must also be considered.

Place

The location of eating events also influences
what is eaten. Within the home, different places are used for
different occasions and social contexts. Away from home, the
location of a meal influences what is eaten not only because of
limits of available food but because of notions of what is
appropriate for the particular place, which is affected by
temporal occasion and social context. Montgomery, Marriott, and
Khare have shown the significance of space for differentiating
eating events in India.

Time, social context, and place lead to
different types of meals and dishes, not only because of
socio-cultural notions of appropriateness (signifying honour,
prestige, and intimacy), but because of logistical feasibility as
well. Some heavy activity periods, the social contexts of a large
group, and certain locations result in structural constraints on
meal types and food choice.

Methods of the Russell Sage Project Study

The goal of the project was to use long-term
intensive observation to understand the structure of meal formats
and meal-cycles. Particular attention was given to whether food
was presented synchronically and diachronically, in what social
order, what sequences of helpings were served, and what etiquette
rules in cutting and eating were observed. The use of decoration
and the non-eating activities accompanying a meal were also
focused on. Figure I is an example of the guide to observations.
The study was not limited only to meals within the household:
because of the emphasis on location and social context, larger
inter-household hospitality events and community-wide eating
events were included, as well as eating events in restaurants and
workplaces.

The Russell Sage Project (Douglas, 1984) also
differed from the research of Douglas and Nicod (1974) in a
number of dimensions, including the methodological difference
that the researchers asked more questions of their informants and
had them describe their own categories of eating events. As with
recipes, information about meal formats (menus) can be very
different if native categories and classifications are used
rather than the observer's frame of reference. Both points of
view are important and revealing.

Goode, Curtis, and Theophano (1981) had already
studied the Italian-American meal system in Philadelphia using
interviews and dietary records. The Russell Sage Project provided
the opportunity to add a new dimension of participant
observation. Observations were limited to four households over
one to two months apiece. However, they were used to complement
data collected by surveys (ideal patterns and recalled events) in
over 200 households as well as records of actual food behaviour
in 35 families.

We hoped to identify broad meal patterns first
and then to examine the way in which dishes and items were
selected for these patterns. We assumed that recurrent, regular
patterns of menu-planning would indicate cultural guidelines that
we could demonstrate to be shared and reinforced. The concern was
with meal plans for household - controlled eating rather than
isolated individual eating away from the domestic context. The
same analysis could be applied to regular, patterned
extra-domestic eating in schools and workplaces. Eating in
domestic groups away from home (restaurants, other homes) was
also included, since the domestic group was active in decisions
to select this type of meal format for a particular occasion.

We recognized that such a rule system would not
operate completely and uniformly within a community. Rules often
present ranges of possible alternatives rather than specific
demands for a particular dish or meal. Moreover, household
variations in activity patterns (work and leisure) and stage in
the life-cycle, age, occupation, and income lead to different
patterns of rule application. Unexpected constraints on time,
personnel, and resources force violations of even broadly stated
rules. Moreover, the strength of social transmission and
reinforcement varies between domestic units depending on the
nature of their embeddedness in social networks and their
internal role structures. Finally, different occasions vary in
terms of community uniformity: the more public the event (the
larger the social context of eating), the more uniformity and
social mediation. On the other hand, the smaller and more private
the social context, the fewer are the social constraints.

Four research strategies were employed in the
following sequence:

Asking people through interviews and
surveys about their ideal patterns, away from the context
of behaviour.

Collecting diaries and records of actual
eating events.

Minimally intrusive observations of food
preparation and meal events without any probing or
discussion.

Direct probing for explanations of
particular choices after a relationship of intimacy and
trust was developed over time.

Our initial strategy, based on a desire for
speed and limitations on funding, was to use a survey instrument
extensively in the community to identify the ideal rules for
ordinary and special occasions. We realized that survey questions
reflect the limited situational, single-point-in-time conditions
understood by the respondent at that moment. Surveys often do not
allow for intensive exploration of situational variation (if. . .
then . . . ). We were able to get extensive information from over
200 households, and clear patterns were revealed. This survey was
followed by the collection of actual dietary intake data in a
smaller sample of households (35) to compare ideal patterns to
real behaviour.

Later, intensive, continuous participant
observation in four households provided us with rich information
on social processes. We would suggest intensive ethnography as a
first research phase prior to the development of an extensive
survey.

Our pilot survey consisted of a 20-page
instrument, administered through a one-hour interview by a small
team of trained interviewers to 200 households. The important
framework for this early stage was identifying the universe of
perceived temporal cycles (daily, weekly, seasonal, calendrical,
and life-cycles), the universe of possible commensal units (the
social context of eating), and the way in which food was used to
pattern events. This phase was largely item-centred, e.g. items
rather than dishes or menus were assumed to mark events. During
this phase a central distinction between types of dish
("gravies" v. "platters") was discovered. The
interview also probed the way in which occasions, social groups,
social statuses (sex and age), and physical conditions (illness,
pregnancy, and lactation) were associated with items, dishes, and
menu types. Negative as well as positive rules were elicited.

As we later concluded, one major problem with
the pilot surveys was their bias toward patterns experienced
during the childhoods of the interviewers. For example, weddings
were inevitably described as they used to be celebrated, as if
the patterns continued today, and there was a great discrepancy
between ideal patterns and the actual behaviour discovered later.
"Ideal" was strongly biased toward the traditional.

The interviews in the early phases of research
did demonstrate some (but not all) shared ideal statements. As we
discovered, early interviews should use open-ended elicitations,
since the interviewer has no knowledge of significant folk
categories and their meanings.